This page brought to you by Ventura County Hang Gliding.
Glider Years Sizes (sq ft) Rating Manufacturer
Raven '79 - '81 179, 209, 229 1 Wills
comments: Floater, Easy handling, Single surface, Poor penetration, Statically tail heavy,
229 used as tandem glider.
Harrier '81 - '84 147, 177, 187 1-2 Wills
(1 & 2)
comments: Easy handling, Single surface, Relatively tight flare timing for a trainer
SkyHawk '84 - '89 168, 188 1 Wills
comments: Refined Harrier for training use. Easy handling / landing
Spectrum '91 - 144, 165 1 Wills
comments: Current Generation Double Surface trainer
I owned a Spectrum 165 and thought it was more for a hang 2 or 3.
It was very manuverable in the air but I could never land it consitently well.
Also the set up was a bit tedious compared to my friends Pac-Air Pulse. I traded the
Spectrum in for a WW Falcon 195 and since I only platform tow once a
month or so and I enjoy the Falcon more. Also, the spectrum I had was
called the "plus" model that was $400 more and included wing tips and
faired down tubes.
Falcon '95 - 170, 195, 225 1 Wills
comments: Single surface trainer. Light, very easy handling.
225 is a good tandem glider
Vision '83 - '86 160, 180, 200 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Easy handling double surface, Good landing characteristics.
Poor penetration for double surface
Eclipse '86 - '87 170, 190 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Next generation Vision, Quasi-keel-pocketless (keel strap)
Some had high speed oscillation problems
Mark IV '88 - '92 170, 190 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Next Generation Vision, Better performance than Eclipse
without oscillation problems.
Pulse '92 - 9, 10, 11 (m2) 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Current generation Vision
XL '91 - 145, 165 1 Moyes
comments: Single Surface, light weight
Gemini 81-84 134, 164, 184 1-2 UP
comments: Single surface Comet, Floating but exposed crossbar.
Well regarded trainer of this period.
XTC ? ? 1+ UP
comments: Single surface trainer series, 205 size used as tandem glider
Dream 85- 145, 165, 185 1 Delta Wing
205, 220, 240
comments: Very popular single surface trainer. Docile handling, easy landing, poor
glide/penetration. The 145 was one of the few good trainers for light (<120 lb)
pilots until several small trainers - Pulse 9M, XL 145, small Spectrum -
hit the market in the early '90s. The 220 was the de facto standard tandem
glider for many years, but the 240 was reputed to be too big and difficult to
handle for all but the largest tandem loads. Production on these models has continued
through UP and later Air Sports International after Delta Wing folded.
Lancer 79-81 155, 180, 200 1 Flight Designs
Super Lancer
comments: Easy handling, easy landing trainer. Quick set-up.
Uncambered plastic battens, Poor speed and penetration
Comparable to Raven without tail heaviness
Javelin 81-83 168, 208 1 Flight Designs
comments: Easy handling, easy landing trainer, Cambered Aluminum ribs
Better performance than Lancer series, comparable to Harrier series
Elan 89- 154 1-3 Avian
comments: 60% Double Surface, very light
Glider Years Sizes (sq ft) Rating Manufacturer
Sport '86 - 150, 167, 180 2 Wills
(& AT)
(& Supersport)
comments: Double Surface, No Keel Pocket, Compromise of good handling,
reasonable landing, glide and penetration characteristics.
7075 tubing made for relatively light weight.
167 Sport AT has proven to be better than average rec. class glider.
Landing flare timing not critical. Very distinct flare cues.
Not tail heavy as in previous WW
Watch for excessive wear on corner fittings.
Some gliders came with unsleeved down tubes. Replace with sleeved ASAP.
Super Sport is NOT a huge gain over Sport AT if at all.
Try and find a used SportAT 167! They are that well liked.
Spectrum '91 - ? 1 Wills
comments: Current Generation Double Surface trainer
Vision '83 - '86 160, 180, 200 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Easy handling double surface, Good landing characteristics.
Poor penetration for double surface
Eclipse '86 - '87 170, 190 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Next generation Vision, Quasi-keel-pocketless (keel strap)
Some had high speed oscillation problems
Mark IV '88 - '92 170, 190 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Next Generation Vision, Better performance than Eclipse
without oscillation problems.
Pulse '92 - 9, 10, 11 (m2) 1-2 Pacific Airwave
comments: Current generation Vision
Formula ? 144, 154 2-3 Pacific Airwave
comments: Double Surface, Good handling
Formulas are yawy gliders but very manoeuvrable.
XT '90 - 145, 165 2 Moyes
comments: Recreational Double Surface
XS3 '93 - 142 3 Moyes
comments: Lightened XS. Easy Handling with good performance.
Small control frame. VG
Comet 3 89-90 185, ? 3 UP
comments: Intermediate level double surface glider. Not produced for long.
Few models in service.
XTR ? ? 3 UP
comments: Aluminum framed version of TRX for intermediates
Aero 91- 145, 165 2 Enterprise Wings
comments: Keelpocketless, recreational double surface wing, No VG, 14 battens
upper-surface, 4 under-surface. Aspect Ratio 5.2. Nose angle 122.
65% double surface. 56 lbs. Great Novice wing.
Rage 95- ? 3 Enterprise Wings (Moyes)
comments: The Rage has a very fast set-up, VG, and very good glide at low to medium speeds.
In Enterprise Wings' tradition is particularly easy to fly.
Mystic 85-87 155, 166, 177 3 Delta Wing
comments: Attempted copy of the then popular Airwave Magic series. Good handling
but never had the performance of the Magic. Many called this glider the
"Mistake", but Kevin Christopherson did set a world distance record in one.
Amour 91- 139, 159 3-4 Avian
comments: Very light, 139 is 56 lbs in bag with a small A-frame. Good for the smaller pilot.
159 is 63 lbs in bag, superb handling.
Sport 88- 150, 160 ? Solar Wings
Rush 94- 15 (m2) ? Solar Wings
Profil 84- 13, 15 (m2) 3 La Mouette
comments: Intermediate double surface glider. Very nice handling, forgives some mistakes,
very easy to control during take off even in turbulent conditions.
Glider Years Sizes (sq ft) Rating Manufacturer
Duck '81 - '83 130, 155, 180, 3 Wills
200
comments: OK handling for an early '80s competition glider, but stiff
by contemporary standards. Extremely tight flare timing
Attack '83 - '84 155, 180 3 Wills
Duck
comments: Similar to Duck but with minor improvements (half-ribs, straight tips)
HP '84 - '88 170 3-4 Wills
(1 & 2)
comments: Stiff handling, fast (for it's day) No keel pocket
Early models in particular were difficult to turn.
HP2 added kingpost hang system and improved handling somewhat
HP-AT '89 - '93 145, 158 3-4 Wills
comments: VG (lever). Easier handling than earlier HP models,
but still reputed to have moderately tight flare timing.
RamAir '93 - 146, 154 4 Wills
comments: Very fast, excellent energy retention and good flare authority,
though some pilots report unusual handling characteristics.
Has undersurface scoop designed to pressurize the wing at high speed.
XC '95 ? 4 Wills
comments: Variant of the RamAir (without the undersurface scoop), reputed to maintain the
performance of the Ram with better handling characteristics
Magic '83 - '88 133,155,166 3 Pacific Airwave
(3 & 4) 177
comments: Fast, Easy Landing, VG, High Pitch Pressures, Heavy
K-series '88 - 94 144, 154, 160 3 Pacific Airwave
(Kiss, K2
K3, K4, K5
comments: VG, Some early Kisses had tuning problems. Some models have
a high speed oscillation tendency. Different models refer
to different sizes (Kiss,K4=154, K2,K5=144, K3=160)
Klassic '94 - 144, 155, 166 3-4 Pacific Airwave
comments: Next generation K-series. 1995 models have optional winglets
that are claimed to improve both handling and high speed performance
GTR '85 - '88 147, 162, 175 3 Moyes
210(!)
comments: Relatively Good Handling, VG, Curved Fiberglass wingtips
Heavy. Bulletproof
XS '88 - '93 142, 155, 169 3-4 Moyes
(1 & 2)
comments: VG, No keel pocket. Good high speed glide. Heavy,
Bulletproof (very hard to break)
Xtralite '93 - 137, 147, 164 4 Moyes
comments: Smaller Lighter XS Descendent, Fast, Relatively Easy Handling
Some improvements in set up ease over XS series.
Sensor 510A 82-84 160, 180 4 Seedwings
comments: VG and keel pocket
Sensor 510B 85-87 160 4 Seedwings
comments: VG, no keel pocket
Sensor 510C 87-89 160 4 Seedwings
comments: VG compensator system
Sensor 510E 90-92 160 4 Seedwings
Sensor 610 93- 144, 152 4 Seedwings
comments: Improved handling and landing characteristics while maintaining
excellent performance. '94 and later models have "flap" system.
Sensor 610F 95- (135), 144, 152 4 Seedwings
Note: The two comments about this entry vary widely.
comments: The latest 610F has the control bar attached behind the CG for
Better flair authority. There are 6 shear ribs per side in lieu of 3
per side previously. The air frame and ribs are constructed of 7075-T3
Aluminum alloy. The 152 weighs 70 lbs. The flap system is integral with the VG
system. Sail areas are actually 152, 144 & 135 Sq.ft. respectively. The stall
speed is 19 mph correct airspeed with flaps (12 mph indicated airspeed).
Min. sink is estimated at 160 fpm at the recommended wing loading of 1.8
lb./sq.ft. The glide ratio is estimated at 14:1. VNE=65 mph, VA=55mph. "Just
pull-in on the VG line and watch as the flap system disengages, transforming your
floater back into a screaming blade wing."
I do not know who put the entry for the Sensor 610F but it is misleading. The 135
size does not yet exist even in prototype form. Delivery for new Sensor exceeds one
year as Bob Trampeneau does everything himself. Furthermore, none of the Sensor 610
are USHGA certified. maybe I am picky but I was looking at buying one and I did some
research. From what I heard from other pilots, I will never but a Sensor myself unless
I want to be a test pilot for Bob.
Comet 80-82 165, 185 3 UP
comments: First of the modern double surface gliders. Good performance for its
day, but rather stiff by current standards, high pitch pressure.
Easier to land than its contemporary, the Duck series.
Comet 2 83-84 165, 185 3-4 UP
comments: Cleaner Comet replacement. Similar.
GZ 85 155 4 UP
comments: Small, heavy, fast. Never became popular before UP folded.
Axis 88-90 13, 15 (m2) 4 UP
comments: Fast, VG, stiff handling. Well regarded as aerobatic gliders.
TRX 91- 140, 160 3-4 UP
comments: Carbon fiber framed, high performance glider with VG.
Significantly lighter than other competing designs. Very
good sink rate and landing characteristics.
Predator 95- 142,158 4 Blue Sky
comments: Blue Sky's succesor to the TRX. Carbon framed, uses vortex generators
on the wing to increase performance. Reported to outperform the TRX.
Predator sails may be retrofitted to TRX frames.
Foil 87-89 160, 170 ? 3-4 Enterprise Wings
comments: Competition glider with reputation for good handling. Has VG
Combat 90-93 137, 152 3-4 Enterprise Wings
comments: Succesor to Foil. Good handling, relatively high pitch pressures.
Desire 93- 141, 151 4 Enterprise Wings
comments: Competition Wing with extremely good handling. named Desire to maintain the letter
tradition started when the company's name was Foil. The Combat was the Foil C.
The Desire is the foil D. The focus on handling highlighted by the success of the
Combat is very clear in the Desire, which coordinates brilliantly in thermals, with
no need to highside (particularly the 151), even with VG full on (most pilots would
fly it with VG on except for take off and landing). Glide is very good and landing is
easy due to a relatively large flare window. Flat rigging and tensioning is possible.
Was the glider of choice of the Australian champion.
Streak 82-84 ? 4 Delta Wing
comments: Stiff, fast (for its day) competition glider. Keel pocket,
No VG. Detached under surface. Several of these tumbled after
tuning modifications
Shadow 83 ? 3 Flight Designs
comments: Double surface competition glider with reputation for good handling
Not many produced before Flight Designs folded.
Java 95- 140, 150, 155 4 Avian
comments: High performance glider that handles easy as an intermediate, very
light VG, excellent speed range, very good climb.
Elite 95- ? 4 Enterprise Wings
comments: Replacement for the Desire. The following is a detailed report taken
from the hang gliding mailing list:
The planform looks different than the Desire. All 7075 tubing so it is
*much* lighter than the Desire. The Leading Edge looks very stiff. There
is no any neoprene between the top and bottom surface at the tips. It
has washout struts. The top of the A-frame is on a short slide, using
the Wills Wing hardware, for laying flat. That is the only WW hardware
though. There is at least one shear web in the tip section.
There are no tips of any kind, and not even any velcro to install them.
Supposedly [Enterprise Wings] had done some wind tunnel tests and the
round type tips most gliders have actually make more drag than just
the open tip.
It has a folding base tube. The VG string travel is quite short and
light. The cross bar pull back is very easy also. The nose wires are
tight. It has the internal LE deflexor like the Desire, but the cable
is heavier and the hardware is improved.
The stock TE cloth is a mylar sandwich, and they are using different
LE cloth. The sail looks very nice. The top of the A frame is at least
6" behind the hang loops. King post hang system, with a neoprene seal
around the king post.
Typhoon 81- ? ? Solar Wings
Typhoon S4 85- 166, 180 ? Solar Wings
comments: Higher performance version of Typhoon
Ace 86- 150, 160, 170 ? Solar Wings
comments: Early performance Rumour with keel pocket. Also available in "RX" racing version
Rumour 89- 13.5, 14.5 (m2) ? Solar Wings
comments: Performance glider, reportedly very stiff
Rumour2 91- 13, 14 (m2) ? Solar Wings
comments: Performance glider, reportedly bad in roll
Rumour 92- 12 (m2) ? Solar Wings
Fever
Rumour3 93- 13, 14 (m2) ? Solar Wings
comments: High performance, improved on 1 & 2
Scandal 95- 12.4, 13.6, 14.4 ? Solar Wings
comments: Newest high performance with APS. Active pressure system - holes in
leading edge, keep its shape at speed
Cobra '92- 13.5 ? La Mouette
comments: High Performance
Compact '92- 13 ? La Mouette
comments: Smaller Cobra
Topless '95- ? ? La Mouette
comments: High performance, no top rigging
CSX '97- ? ? Moyes
comments: Version of the SX series with a carbon spar and no top rigging. Reputed
to be very fast with a great glide.
Return to the Ventura County HG home page.